Case law

In Re Sae Young Westmont-Chicago, L.L.C.

276 B.R. 888 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · May 2, 2002

In 1997, Debtor established five separate land trusts to acquire leasehold interests in five buildings at the former world headquarters of Sears & Roebuck Company (the “properties”). … However, the present case is clearly distinguishable. First, there has been no compulsory process used to require the state to appear in this forum. In fact, the State only appeared here to challenge jurisdiction.

In Re Connelly

59 B.R. 421 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 27, 1986

It is for the court to say whether his silence is justified, * * * and to require him to answer ‘if it clearly appears that he is mistaken’ * * Hoffman v. … “[A] witness need not establish that an answer to a question or an explanation why an answer cannot be given will in fact incriminate.

Olson v. Potter (In Re Potter)

88 B.R. 843 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 31, 1988

Moreover, it is the possibility of prosection, not the judge’s assessment of the likelihood of such prosecution, which establishes a valid claim. … Clearly a debtor can assert a valid Fifth Amendment privilege under section 727(a)(6) of the Code and receive a discharge unless the debtor has been granted immunity.

In Re Automotive Professionals, Inc.

370 B.R. 161 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 12, 2007

It argues that the State has sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution from such orders and that the Director is considered the State for purposes of sovereign immunity. … The court need not decide whether the Director stands in the shoes of the State for purposes of sovereign immunity because the State has no such immunity. In Central Virginia Community College v.

Brinson v. United States (In re Brinson)

485 B.R. 890 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 28, 2013

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY The United States has first challenged jurisdiction in the Complaint filed by Brinson on the ground of sovereign immunity. … It is well established that lien stripping is permissible in Chapter 13.

In Re Kids Creek Partners, L.P.

248 B.R. 554 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · May 19, 2000

personal immunity if operating directly in obedience to a court order. … Such potential risks and liability would present tremendous disincentives for qualified individuals to *560 serve as trustees.

Chambers v. Manning (In Re Chambers)

283 B.R. 913 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 1, 2002

Therefore, the burden falls upon Manning to establish that the expenses incurred by the debtor qualify as a loan under § 523(a)(8). … Therefore, Manning has not met her burden of establishing that UIC made a loan for purposes of § 523(a)(8), and the debtor has established that she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law that her debt to UIC is discharged

Abernathy v. United States (In Re Abernathy)

158 B.R. 749 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 6, 1993

Moreover, McKenzie’s alleged expertise in bankruptcy does not qualify as a special factor under § 7430 in this case. … Effective January 1, 1986, § 7430(c) was amended to its current form. *755 The 1986 amendment established the $75 an hour fee rate, and allowed courts to subsequently add COLAs to that rate.

Pullman Construction Industries, Inc. v. United States (In Re Pullman Construction Industries, Inc.)

186 B.R. 88 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 30, 1995

N.D.Ill.1993) (Marovich, J.), appeal dismissed, 23 F.3d 1166 (7th Cir.1994), and pursuant to the subsequent enactment of 11 U.S.C. § 106 (effective Oct. 22, 1994), the United States cannot raise the defense of sovereign immunity … With regard to the fifth contested payment of $119,716.00, Pullman clearly designated that the payment was applicable to trust fund liabilities alone.

In Re Sumpter

171 B.R. 835 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 22, 1994

The Debtor is clearly an individual for purposes of section 362(h), and has standing to invoke a claim for his damages and attorney’s fees. … The evidence before this Court establishes none of these required elements of proof. C.

Helms v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. (In re O'Malley)

601 B.R. 629 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · May 23, 2019

July 24, 1991) ("While the discussions in [a particular case] are dicta and therefore not binding on [the court], they are clearly helpful and [the court] rel[ies] heavily on the thoughtful analysis" therein); In re Arguin … As to avoidance, the undisputed facts in this matter establish that the TAMO transfers satisfy all four elements required under § 549(a).

Haywood v. Illinois (In Re Haywood)

62 B.R. 482 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 20, 1986

The foregoing clearly establishes that the debtor was required to file amended State income tax returns after the adjustment to his federal income tax returns became final. … Clearly they were not fulfilled by the State, nor could they be. The State’s work papers cannot possibly constitute a filing under applicable State law.

In Re Price

143 B.R. 190 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 15, 1992

The purpose and length of the conversation and the person called or calling must be clearly set forth in the application. Id. … REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES The Applicant bears the burden of establishing that it is entitled to certain expenses.

Rezin v. Barr (In Re Barr)

194 B.R. 1009 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 3, 1996

Most significant, the evidence did not establish the assertion that Mr. … of the false impression created by Bozzano that he was qualified to build the house and was doing so competently.”

In re 35th & Morgan Development Corp.

510 B.R. 832 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 30, 2014

“Qualified Creditor.” … The Alleged Debtor is clearly not generally paying its debts as they become due. CONCLUSION The petitioning creditors were entitled to bring the involuntary petition against Alleged Debtor.

In Re Chicago South Shore & South Bend Railroad

101 B.R. 10 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 16, 1989

It is the court’s opinion that they clearly had such interests while representing the CM & W. … This court is not inclined to measure a degree of disinterestedness or interestedness to see whether it is sufficient to qualify or disqualify.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Crystal Medical Products, Inc. v. Houpt (In Re Crystal Medical Products, Inc.)

240 B.R. 290 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 29, 1999

qualifies for protection from avoidance under § 547(c)(1). … Clearly, paying a supplier of products or services used in the everyday business qualifies as the ordinary course of business of the debtor. The issue is less clear, however, when more unusual situations are involved.

119th & Halsted Currency Exchange v. Blake-Ware (In Re Blake-Ware)

155 B.R. 476 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · May 11, 1993

Such assertions clearly qualify as statements under § 523(a)(2)(A). … See Harasymiw, 895 F.2d at 1174 (refusal to overturn lower court’s decision based on the plaintiff’s compliance with its establishing lending procedures).

Payne v. United States (In Re Payne)

188 A.L.R. Fed. 649 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 3, 2002

. § 7502 1 which allows a *723 postmark to establish the filing date of a tax return which is mailed before the tax filing deadline. … Clearly, Congress did not intend such a result when it enacted § 7502 to alleviate the inequities caused by disparate postal systems. Miller, 784 F.2d at 730 (§ 7502 is remedial statute).

Carroll v. Vernon (In Re Vernon)

192 B.R. 165 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 26, 1996

Each element must be established by a preponderance of the evidence. Grogan, 498 U.S. at 285 , 111 S.Ct. at 658 . 12. … That clearly posed a threat to its fees, both those *173 earned in the past and those about to be earned.